Is infant baptism from the Bible?

[Particular]

SOLA SCRIPTURA, my brother!


YOU demanded: "Let us not insert as truth, what God does not expressly declare as truth."

Ah. No Anabaptist tradition. No Catholic tradition. No Lutheran tradition. Just what is "expressly declared." That's your repeated demand of all (although you consistently and absolutely exempt one from this demand).



"Baptism now saves you.' Those are LITERAL, VERBATIM, "expressly declared" black-and-white words of Scripture. You may disagree with Lamm's "take" on this, the same (as far as we know) of all Christians before some wackadoddle Anabaptist came along, the same a nearly all Christians still view it, but it is undeniable those ARE the literal, verbatim, exact, expressly declared ,stated words of the Bible. Sola Scriptura = no spin, look at the words (or as YOU demand, "expressly stated"). So, Lamm has Sola Scriptura, she has the verbatim, literal, "expressly stated" words.

Where do you find the following verbatim, literal, "expressly declared" words that state your new Anabaptist tradition you parrot endlessly? You know, the reference for each of the following Anabaptist traditions you echo on and on?

"Thou canst NOT baptize any until they hath celebrated a certain birthday, but you won't be told which one that is."

"Thou canst NOT baptize any until they hath adequately proven they hath chosen Jesus as their personal Savior and hath correctly chanteth the Sinner's Prayer."

"Thou canst NOT baptize any unless you submergeth ever cell of their body entirely under water."

Why don't you abide by your own mandate here? Why demand this of everyone else but so entirely exempt just yourself from this? You insist we cannot insert as truth what God has not 'expressly declared" and yet as you keep proving, you have NOT ONE VERSE that "expressly declares" ANY part of this new Anabaptist tradition you endlessly parrot. You've proven it. Over and over. For nearly a year now.





.

Yep, Sola Scriptura, which is what I use and you don't use. Instead, you revert to sola lutherana and its tradition.

 

[brian100]

Jesus said not to stop the Children from coming or you wont enter heaven?

 

[Particular]

Jesus said not to stop the Children from coming or you wont enter heaven?

That has zero to do with infant baptism.
If infant baptism was needed for salvation, why didn't it start when Cain was born? Why didn't Jesus or John the Baptist emphasize baptizing children?
There is zero evidence in the Bible. The entire tradition was made up centuries later.

 

[Andrew]

I'll just put this here, although it doesn't speak specifically on infant baptism it does speak of the very meaning and purpose of baptism.. plus it's a new Lutheran Satire

 

[Josiah]

Particular,

That has zero to do with infant baptism.

NOTHING you quote states any of new tradition and restrictions the Anabaptists invented and place on Baptism.

Your ENTIRE Anabaptist tradition was made up centuries later, in the late 16th Century.


You demand, " "Let us not insert as truth, what God does not expressly declare as truth." Yet all you do on this is insert as truth the new Anabaptist tradition that you prove the Bible does not expressly declare. You just parrot your new Anabaptist traditions, all these restrictions and limitations.



Where does the words of Scripture (Sola Scriptura) "expressly declare" each of the new Anabaptist traditions and inventions you endlesslty parrot?

"Thou canst NOT baptize any until they hath celebrated a certain birthday, but you won't be told which one that is." (Anti-Paedobaptism)

"Thou canst NOT baptize any until they hath adequately proven they hath chosen Jesus as their personal Savior and hath correctly chanteth the Sinner's Prayer." (Credobaptism)

"Thou canst NOT baptize any unless you submergeth ever cell of their body entirely under water." (Immersion only baptism)

Why don't you abide by your own mandate here? Why demand this of everyone else but so entirely exempt just yourself from this? You insist we cannot insert as truth what God has not 'expressly declared" and yet as you keep proving, you have NOT ONE VERSE that "expressly declares" ANY part of this new Anabaptist tradition you endlessly parrot. You've proven it. Over and over. IF you can show the Bible "expressly declares" each of these 3 aspects of the new Anabaptist tradition, then be the first in nearly 500 years to actually quote them. But you can't do it either. So all you do is what you mock, ridicule and disallow.

You mock Lamm because she CAN quote - verbatim, literally, word-for-word - exactly, expressly what the Bible declares. But you have NOTHING that states these new Anabaptist inventions/traditions.






.

 

[Particular]

Particular,





NOTHING you quote states any of new tradition and restrictions the Anabaptists invented and place on Baptism.

Your ENTIRE Anabaptist tradition was made up centuries later, in the late 16th Century.


You demand, " "Let us not insert as truth, what God does not expressly declare as truth." Yet all you do on this is insert as truth the new Anabaptist tradition that you prove the Bible does not expressly declare. You just parrot your new Anabaptist traditions, all these restrictions and limitations.



Where does the words of Scripture (Sola Scriptura) "expressly declare" each of the new Anabaptist traditions and inventions you endlesslty parrot?

"Thou canst NOT baptize any until they hath celebrated a certain birthday, but you won't be told which one that is." (Anti-Paedobaptism)

"Thou canst NOT baptize any until they hath adequately proven they hath chosen Jesus as their personal Savior and hath correctly chanteth the Sinner's Prayer." (Credobaptism)

"Thou canst NOT baptize any unless you submergeth ever cell of their body entirely under water." (Immersion only baptism)

Why don't you abide by your own mandate here? Why demand this of everyone else but so entirely exempt just yourself from this? You insist we cannot insert as truth what God has not 'expressly declared" and yet as you keep proving, you have NOT ONE VERSE that "expressly declares" ANY part of this new Anabaptist tradition you endlessly parrot. You've proven it. Over and over. IF you can show the Bible "expressly declares" each of these 3 aspects of the new Anabaptist tradition, then be the first in nearly 500 years to actually quote them. But you can't do it either. So all you do is what you mock, ridicule and disallow.

You mock Lamm because she CAN quote - verbatim, literally, word-for-word - exactly, expressly what the Bible declares. But you have NOTHING that states these new Anabaptist inventions/traditions.






.

This is because what I quote is scripture, not tradition. You are stuck in tradition, Josiah, which is why you don't practice Sola Scriptura, but instead practice sola lutherana.
You then use the poor argument that no specific verse is against it, therefore it must be correct. Such an argument opens up to a myriad of false teachings that the Bible does not directly address. If you were consistent, you would accept all the false teachings that do not have a direct rebuttal in the Bible as they all use your logic of legitimacy.

 

[brian100]

How else are you guys stopping Children from coming to him? >> its a future message about Infant Baptism.

 

[Particular]

How else are you guys stopping Children from coming to him? >> its a future message about Infant Baptism.

Please show me a 2 week old to 3 month old child that openly comes to Jesus as a believer and then is baptized.
No one denies a child the opportunity to be in church with the community of believers and hear the good news of Jesus drawing rebels to himself and reconciling them to redemption.

But, that's not what you are talking about. You are talking about you, yourself, forcibly pouring or immersing an infant into water and then repeating a lie to that infant that the forcible ceremony the parents performed resulted in the infants salvation.

That has nothing in common with the little children coming to Jesus and Jesus holding them in his arms.

 

[brian100]

Jesus said do not stop the children from coming to him .... b/c he baptizes them with the Holy Spirit.

Mark10

15 I promise you that you cannot get into God's kingdom, unless you accept it the way a child does.” 16Then Jesus took the children in his arms and blessed them by placing his hands on them.

 

[Josiah]

This is because what I quote is scripture, not tradition.

Agreed, you DO occasionally quote Scripture to prove NONE of your Anabaptists Traditions you parrot are found there.


You demand: "Let us not insert as truth, what God does not expressly declare as truth."
You just parrot your new Anabaptist traditions, all these restrictions and limitations. Over and over.
Although yes you occasionally prove there is no Scripture that "expressly declare" such (as truth or myth or at all).



Where does the words of Scripture (Sola Scriptura) "expressly declare" each of the new Anabaptist traditions and inventions you endlessly parrot:

"Thou canst NOT baptize any until they hath celebrated a certain birthday, but you won't be told which one that is." (Anti-Paedobaptism)

"Thou canst NOT baptize any until they hath adequately proven they hath chosen Jesus as their personal Savior and hath correctly chanteth the Sinner's Prayer." (Credobaptism)

"Thou canst NOT baptize any unless you submergeth ever cell of their body entirely under water." (Immersion only baptism)

Where does the words of Scripture (Sola Scriptura) "expressly declare" each of these new Anabaptist traditions and inventions you endlessly parrot? Why don't you abide by your own mandate here? Why demand this of everyone else but so entirely exempt just yourself from this? You insist we cannot insert as truth what God has not 'expressly declared" and yet as you keep proving, you have NOT ONE VERSE that "expressly declares" ANY part of this new Anabaptist tradition you endlessly parrot. You've proven it. Over and over. IF you can show the Bible "expressly declares" each of these 3 aspects of the new Anabaptist tradition, then be the first in nearly 500 years to actually quote them. But you can't do it either. So all you do is what you mock, ridicule and disallow.

You mock Lamm because she CAN quote - verbatim, literally, word-for-word - exactly, expressly what the Bible declares (Sola Scriptura). But you have NOTHING that states these new Anabaptist inventions/traditions. You prove it. Every time you quote a verse.




.

 

[Particular]

Jesus said do not stop the children from coming to him .... b/c he baptizes them with the Holy Spirit.

Mark10

15 I promise you that you cannot get into God's kingdom, unless you accept it the way a child does.” 16Then Jesus took the children in his arms and blessed them by placing his hands on them.

Then, all humanity is baptized as infants with the Holy Spirit and all humanity is saved at infancy.

But, that is not what the Bible teaches at all regarding humanity.

Brian, it is clear you want something to be true, but you have no understanding of the Bible and thus make things up according to how you feel.

 

[Particular]

Agreed, you DO occasionally quote Scripture to prove NONE of your Anabaptists Traditions you parrot are found there.


You demand: "Let us not insert as truth, what God does not expressly declare as truth."
You just parrot your new Anabaptist traditions, all these restrictions and limitations. Over and over.
Although yes you occasionally prove there is no Scripture that "expressly declare" such (as truth or myth or at all).



Where does the words of Scripture (Sola Scriptura) "expressly declare" each of the new Anabaptist traditions and inventions you endlessly parrot:

"Thou canst NOT baptize any until they hath celebrated a certain birthday, but you won't be told which one that is." (Anti-Paedobaptism)

"Thou canst NOT baptize any until they hath adequately proven they hath chosen Jesus as their personal Savior and hath correctly chanteth the Sinner's Prayer." (Credobaptism)

"Thou canst NOT baptize any unless you submergeth ever cell of their body entirely under water." (Immersion only baptism)

Where does the words of Scripture (Sola Scriptura) "expressly declare" each of these new Anabaptist traditions and inventions you endlessly parrot? Why don't you abide by your own mandate here? Why demand this of everyone else but so entirely exempt just yourself from this? You insist we cannot insert as truth what God has not 'expressly declared" and yet as you keep proving, you have NOT ONE VERSE that "expressly declares" ANY part of this new Anabaptist tradition you endlessly parrot. You've proven it. Over and over. IF you can show the Bible "expressly declares" each of these 3 aspects of the new Anabaptist tradition, then be the first in nearly 500 years to actually quote them. But you can't do it either. So all you do is what you mock, ridicule and disallow.

You mock Lamm because she CAN quote - verbatim, literally, word-for-word - exactly, expressly what the Bible declares (Sola Scriptura). But you have NOTHING that states these new Anabaptist inventions/traditions. You prove it. Every time you quote a verse.




.

There are no traditions to prove. Unlike you, I live by Sola Scriptura and what the Bible tells us, not by sola lutherana and what your concord tells you.

 

[brian100]

I have the sola shroud to look at.

Jesus said don't stop the babies from having baptism (coming to him).

 

[Josiah]

There are no traditions to prove. Unlike you, I live by Sola Scriptura and what the Bible tells us, not by sola lutherana and what your concord tells you.

GREAT!

So, just do as you demand: "Let us not insert as truth, what God does not expressly declare as truth."

Don't say a word that Anabaptists do about baptism, don't repeat a claim or teaching or invention of ANYONE or ANY DENOMINATION that holds to credobaptism or anti-paedobaptism or immersion-only baptism. Do as you insist. Just repeat verbatim what Scripture "expressly declares as truth."

Give the biblical reference where the words in the Bible "expressly declares" the Anabaptist inventions you echo:

"Thou canst NOT baptize any until they hath celebrated a certain birthday, but you won't be told which one that is." (Anti-Paedobaptism Tradition). Just verbatim quote the verse(s) that "expressly declares" this. Don't echo something some Baptist "expressly declared", quote the verse(s) expressly declaring this invention of yours as truth.

"Thou canst NOT baptize any until they hath adequately proven they hath chosen Jesus as their personal Savior and hath correctly chanteth the Sinner's Prayer." (Credobaptism Tradition) Just verbatim quote the verse(s) that "expressly declares" this. Don't echo something some Baptist "expressly declared", quote the verse(s) expressly declaring this invention of yours as truth.

"Thou canst NOT baptize any unless you submergeth ever cell of their body entirely under water." (Immersion only baptism Tradition) Just verbatim quote the verse(s) that "expressly declares" this. Don't echo something some Baptist "expressly declared", quote the verse(s) expressly declaring this invention of yours as truth.


Do as you insist everyone ELSE do. Stop echoing Anabaptist inventions, spins and tradition. And ONLY verbatim quote the words "Scripture expressly declares as truth." Not only do you NOT do as you demand, you actually quote Scripture to prove NO SCRIPTURE "expressly declares" your Anabaptist traditions as truth (or as anything).






.

 

[Particular]

GREAT!

So, just do as you demand: "Let us not insert as truth, what God does not expressly declare as truth."

Don't say a word that Anabaptists do about baptism, don't repeat a claim or teaching or invention of ANYONE or ANY DENOMINATION that holds to credobaptism or anti-paedobaptism or immersion-only baptism. Do as you insist. Just repeat verbatim what Scripture "expressly declares as truth."

Give the biblical reference where the words in the Bible "expressly declares" the Anabaptist inventions you echo:

"Thou canst NOT baptize any until they hath celebrated a certain birthday, but you won't be told which one that is." (Anti-Paedobaptism Tradition). Just verbatim quote the verse(s) that "expressly declares" this. Don't echo something some Baptist "expressly declared", quote the verse(s) expressly declaring this invention of yours as truth.

"Thou canst NOT baptize any until they hath adequately proven they hath chosen Jesus as their personal Savior and hath correctly chanteth the Sinner's Prayer." (Credobaptism Tradition) Just verbatim quote the verse(s) that "expressly declares" this. Don't echo something some Baptist "expressly declared", quote the verse(s) expressly declaring this invention of yours as truth.

"Thou canst NOT baptize any unless you submergeth ever cell of their body entirely under water." (Immersion only baptism Tradition) Just verbatim quote the verse(s) that "expressly declares" this. Don't echo something some Baptist "expressly declared", quote the verse(s) expressly declaring this invention of yours as truth.


Do as you insist everyone ELSE do. Stop echoing Anabaptist inventions, spins and tradition. And ONLY verbatim quote the words "Scripture expressly declares as truth." Not only do you NOT do as you demand, you actually quote Scripture to prove NO SCRIPTURE "expressly declares" your Anabaptist traditions as truth (or as anything).






.

I take it you will now renounce infant baptism as a non-biblical ceremony.

 

[brian100]

Jesus makes an ominous warning to people who want to stop the children from going to him in Baptism.

Mark10

15 I promise you that you cannot get into God's kingdom, unless you accept it the way a child does.” 16Then Jesus took the children in his arms and blessed them by placing his hands on them.

So never put yourself in that position. He said "I promise"

 

[Particular]

Jesus makes an ominous warning to people who want to stop the children from going to him in Baptism.

Mark10

15 I promise you that you cannot get into God's kingdom, unless you accept it the way a child does.” 16Then Jesus took the children in his arms and blessed them by placing his hands on them.

So never put yourself in that position. He said "I promise"

Jesus isn't talking about baptism. Brian, you are just making things up and claiming your make believe as reality.

 

[brian100]

What else would strop children from going to him ... only Protestants do that.

 

[Lamb]

No, it doesn't. Re-read Acts 2. Peter is not saying that water baptism saves.
You force water into every instance where the common term, baptizo (immersion) is used. You don't care that the context doesn't have water surrounding the word. You just toss it in with no regard because you think it makes your assertion valid.

You reject that God's grace is in places where He says it will be.

 

[Particular]

You reject that God's grace is in places where He says it will be.

God doesn't say his salvation is caused by your baptism. You misunderstand grace when you tie it to a work you are doing so that you can acquire a favor from God. In that case you are not receiving grace, you are receiving the wages you believe you deserve, based upon the action you took.